|
When lawyers ramble, so do misconstructions.
As Joe Kimble states in his essay, Answering the Critic's Plain Language, "It is much harder to simplify than to complicate. Anybody can take the sludge from formbooks, thicken it with a few more provisions, and leave it at that. Only the best minds and best writers can cut through." We feel that simple english is the simplest, most-direct way of transferring your ideas in writing. It uses only as many words as required. It avoids superfluous or arcane vocabulary. And it gets the point across without the disguise of lawyerisms.
Don't lawyers and judges expect documents to sound like an attorney wrote them?
Judges read hundreds of pleadings each week, as do attorneys read and respond to dozens of pleadings each week. A document that is filled with heretofore's, hyperboles, rhetorical questions, and Latin phrases just adds to the judge's workload. A clear, concise, Plain English brief makes the judge's job easier, and has a better chance of persuading the judge to rule for our client.
Are Plain English contracts enforceable?
Yes. Plain English written contracts remove ambiguity and are interpreted exactly as they read. Misinterpretations followed by lawsuits minimize when the the contract or document is clear and unconcealed.
Can you show me what you mean by Plain English?
Yes. One law firm writes:
"Buyer and Seller agree that identification shall not be deemed to have been made until both parties have agreed that the goods in question are to be appropriated and fulfill the requirements of performance of said contract with the buyer."
We use:
"The identification of the goods covered by this contract are those goods delivered to, and accepted by buyer, which both fulfill and satisfy the buyer's requirements."
Which one gets the idea accross and is easier to read?
How can I learn more about your Unlimited Advice Plan?
Contact us any way that is convenient to you. We will be happy to answer all of your questions on why this approach is better for you.
 
|
|
 |